I got this today and as usual a great addon by Justflight, only small little issue I have is that no matter the curve I add, the wheel brakes feel very sensitive.

Overall very happy that I have a JF regional Alliance and Virign flights to do between airports along the East Coast of Australia.

What I like about JF is they make their cockpits look less cartoonish and more realistic, Fenix is another master at that.

3 hours ago, AJZip2 said:

Ignore the above!! It wasn't anything to do with the mouse configuration at all... There were some leftover default commands still in my Honeycomb Yoke and also Throttle blocks that related to APU!!

I know that I cleared ALL supplied Honeycomb commands when I first got the controllers a few years ago - but the little tinkers clearly snuck these two back in!! Those spurious commands are now removed and all of a sudden my Legacy mouse settings worked a dream! 😊

I think this was the reason on my first attempt today that I couldn’t get the engines started!!! All cleared for next attempt tomorrow morning as I ran out of time.

18 hours ago, JYW said:

Well, yes and no.

His issue is that the INIT B page is unavailable to him, because he starts the flight with the engines running. But that is a realistic representation of the FMS. INIT B concerns fuel-related pre-flight calculations, so if the engines are started and fuel begins to be burned, the INIT B page is inaccessible as it can no long compute everything that it needs to.

Again, this is real-world behaviour and the Airbus A320 works exactly the same.

This is a high-end addon, systems-wise, so I guess it's just a case that if you want to use the systems to their full breadth, starting the flight with the engines running is going to prevent some aspects of being able to do that.

If JF had built it so that INIT B was still available with the engines running, some people would have complained that this was not realistic 😉

Having said all of that, I'm not fully convinced that not populating the INIT B page will actually prevent Profile (VNAV) mode from working. I've only made 2 flights in this bird so will need to dig deeper. As I never start a flight with the engines running, I was able to populate INIT B, Profile mode worked fine, and I didn't see any issues.

Well in the PMDG 737's I would have to fill in the blanks in the Perf section of the FMS such as gross weight, cruising altitude, cost index, reserves, V1, V2, Vr in order to get a VNAV to work and I could do this with the engines running at start. That's why I suspect that I might need to fill in blanks on the next 2 pages of the INIT section of the F70/F100. Is there a default VNAV profile where I shouldn't have to enter performance characteristics and only my cruising altitude in the FMS for the autopilot follow standard VNAV profile for the F70/100 so I can start with engines running and use VNAV for the autopilot. You say that you are not convinced that the auto pilot will not follow VNAV from climb to descent without access to the next page of the INIT of the FMS to enter the data into the blanks like when I'm starting with the engines running? In other aircraft in FS2024 and X-Plane 12 I would have to add certain data besides cruising altitude for the VNAV to work, especially in the Perf section of the PMDG's. So there should be a standard VNAV profile in the F70/F100 that the autopilot can follow without needing to enter the data into 2nd page and following pages of the INIT?

Edited yesterday at 04:24 PM1 day by SpeedPilot

36 minutes ago, SpeedPilot said:

Well in the PMDG 737's I would have to fill in the blanks in the Perf section of the FMS such as gross weight, cruising altitude, cost index, reserves, V1, V2, Vr in order to get a VNAV to work and I could do this with the engines running at start. That's why I suspect that I might need to fill in blanks on the next 2 pages of the INIT section of the F70/F100. Is there a default VNAV profile where I shouldn't have to enter performance characteristics and only my cruising altitude in the FMS for the autopilot follow standard VNAV profile for the F70/100 so I can start with engines running and use VNAV for the autopilot. You say that you are not convinced that the auto pilot will not follow VNAV from climb to descent without access to the next page of the INIT of the FMS to enter the data into the blanks like when I'm starting with the engines running? In other aircraft in FS2024 and X-Plane 12 I would have to add certain data besides cruising altitude for the VNAV to work, especially in the Perf section of the PMDG's. So there should be a standard VNAV profile in the F70/F100 that the autopilot can follow without needing to enter the data into 2nd page and following pages of the INIT?

No, VNAV needs weights and routes and a cost index to generate a profile for both the climb and descent.

If the FMS isn’t accepting data with the engines running, then you need to turn them off to enter it all.

5 hours ago, rick celik said:

What I like about JF is they make their cockpits look less cartoonish and more realistic, Fenix is another master at that.

all the Fokker hype got me to haul out the BAe 146 for a few flights. And yep, JF does a great job! I still haven’t gotten the RJ, and these few flights have rekindled that desire, because it’s likely every bit as good.

On an interesting side note, the JF BAe 146 for X-Plane (converted by Thranda) is one of the VERY few cockpits that don’t have the annoying “silver shimmer” cockpits that most XP addons have in v12 (including Thranda’s own).

I can only imagine that the quality of JF’s excellent modeling/texturing is somehow at work there.

48 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

On an interesting side note, the JF BAe 146 for X-Plane (converted by Thranda) is one of the VERY few cockpits that don’t have the annoying “silver shimmer” cockpits that most XP addons have in v12 (including Thranda’s own).

It’s also the only JF 146 that actually flies in a correct nose down negative pitch attitude on approach , the P3D and MSFS versions sadly fly the approach nose up like 737, which for me sadly means I just can’t use them. To me the nose down approach of the 146 was one of its defining features so I just can’t live with the inaccuracy, which is a shame as the rest of it is ok.

2 hours ago, ATRguy said:

No, VNAV needs weights and routes and a cost index to generate a profile for both the climb and descent.

If the FMS isn’t accepting data with the engines running, then you need to turn them off to enter it all.

If that is required, then it is a bit of a deal breaker for me. I start at the GATE with engines running, and I fully expect to be able to set up the aircraft for a flight from that initial state. At this point, I am starting to wonder whether it would be better for me to stick with PMDG (or other Boeing) airliners, as they have always been really easy to set up and fly (in FSX/P3D/MSFS) over the past fifteen years without any problems (737/747/777).

If that ends up being the case, roll on the PMDG 747-400, Vector 787, and Bluebird 757!

Edited yesterday at 07:32 PM1 day by Christopher Low

1 hour ago, jon b said:

It’s also the only JF 146 that actually flies in a correct nose down negative pitch attitude on approach , the P3D and MSFS versions sadly fly the approach nose up like 737, which for me sadly means I just can’t use them. To me the nose down approach of the 146 was one of its defining features so I just can’t live with the inaccuracy, which is a shame as the rest of it is ok.

Dang it, Jon - you’ve ruined my fantasy with your silly insistence on realism!!!

🤣

In truth, I GREATLY appreciate that nugget of info. 🙏

It will make me fly the XP version instead (and be happy about it, too) - any time I can get even a bit closer to IRL handling, I’ll gladly take it. 👍

1 hour ago, Christopher Low said:

If that is required, then it is a bit of a deal breaker for me. I start at the GATE with engines running, and I fully expect to be able to set up the aircraft for a flight from that initial state. At this point, I am starting to wonder whether it would be better for me to stick with PMDG (or other Boeing) airliners, as they have always been really easy to set up and fly (in FSX/P3D/MSFS) over the past fifteen years without any problems (737/747/777).

If that ends up being the case, roll on the PMDG 747-400, Vector 787, and Bluebird 757!

I may have found a mid point compromise to this, @Christopher Low .

At the moment, I don't have the time to learn - or to operate - a full 'cold and dark' on an aircraft as 'study-level' as this one. So this evening, I explored just what you CAN do, instead, using the 'Turnaround' state.

And I was pleasantly surprised.

The boot up, at a gate, was engines and APU off. The EFB allowed me to:

• 'speed' load fuel, passengers, etc.

• Connect to external power

• Load a Simbrief plan into the MCDU

• Calculate T/O & landing calcs on the EFB and one-click them, including relevant Metar into the aircraft's MCDU

  I then could:

• Start up the APU

• Start the engines

  All of the above took less than 20 minutes

• Then call for pushback

• Fly the route

• Land

• Shut down

So Turnaround works less like 'Cold & Dark' and more like 'Cool and Dark'! An excellent and very satisfying flight started and completed in not much more than an hour, of which at least 30 minutes was the flight itself!

1 hour ago, Christopher Low said:

If that is required, then it is a bit of a deal breaker for me. I start at the GATE with engines running, and I fully expect to be able to set up the aircraft for a flight from that initial state. At this point, I am starting to wonder whether it would be better for me to stick with PMDG (or other Boeing) airliners, as they have always been really easy to set up and fly (in FSX/P3D/MSFS) over the past fifteen years without any problems (737/747/777).

If that ends up being the case, roll on the PMDG 747-400, Vector 787, and Bluebird 757!

Sensible take. 👍

Don’t most airliners exist in a Turn Around state these days, anyway…? I.e., not engines running, but definitely not cold n dark.

Besides, what if flight crew had to make a major diversion in-flight…? Would they have to land first (🤣)?

flybe BAe 146 aircraft landing at Birmingham Internationa...

Download this stock image: flybe BAe 146 aircraft landing at Birmingham International Airport, West Midlands, England, UK - A8GDDX from Alamy's library of millions of high resolution stock photos, ill

@UrgentSiesta 😔 I tried all sorts of flap and speedbrake combinations, I just couldn’t make it do this ☝️

Edited 22 hours ago22 hr by jon b

It takes me less than 5 minutes to set up my PMDG 737 when I load it in the "Ready to Taxi" mode. I have a standard procedure (including fuel load) for my circuit flights at multiple airports, so I do not need to mess about. I would want to be able to do exactly the same thing with the JustFlight Fokker 70/100. If that is not possible, then it is extremely disappointing. I was looking forward to flying these aircraft in MSFS 2024.

5 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

It takes me less than 5 minutes to set up my PMDG 737 when I load it in the "Ready to Taxi" mode. I have a standard procedure (including fuel load) for my circuit flights at multiple airports, so I do not need to mess about. I would want to be able to do exactly the same thing with the JustFlight Fokker 70/100. If that is not possible, then it is extremely disappointing. I was looking forward to flying these aircraft in MSFS 2024.

The "turnaround" state can also be selected with APU running (all though APU starts quite quickly). The disconnecting of the GPU takes longer (like 30 sec...)

After a weekend of flying I also got is down to.

1. Select the Turnaround panel state

2. Load simbrief in the EFB

3. Load the payload in the EFB with loading set on instant

4. Load the flightplan into FMC

5. Select the SID and STARS in FMC

6. Via the performance page on EFB load the Weights, and speeds into the FMC

7. Start engine and taxi out.

I think this isn't anything different from the PMDG (it's even quicker as you don't need to switch the Bleed air). I'm taxing within 5 min if I want to, it's just learning the flow. It allowed me to do 3 sectors in just over 2 hours (being only short flights crossing the North Sea back and forth). As in IRL the taxing at EHAM was the most time consuming part of it all.

Can selecting fuel load/cargo be done via the FMS? In other words, can I bypass the EFB? It always felt a bit "clunky" with the Avro RJ Professional, and it looks like a very similar format with the Fokker 70/100.

1 hour ago, Christopher Low said:

Can selecting fuel load/cargo be done via the FMS? In other words, can I bypass the EFB? It always felt a bit "clunky" with the Avro RJ Professional, and it looks like a very similar format with the Fokker 70/100.

No i don't think so. Loading the aircraft needs to be done via EFB Aircraft page.

Thereafter the weights needs to be send to FMC is via the Performance page on the EFB.